Religious point of view

J.L. Austen makes the distinction between with the illustration of a star.

• Some see a silvery speck no greater than a five pence piece.
• Some see a distant star with an extension greater than that of Earth.

The second is an example of 'seeing-as' what we see is classified in terms of our background knowledge of stars, imformed by our understanding.

The first involves a straightforward description of what we observe and little knowledge is brought to the observation.

Religious point of view is a way of seeing-as, interpreting concsiously or unconcsiously. Different factors mould our way of seeing as; prior expectations, beliefs held about the world, emotional aspects, cultural or our conceptual scheme.

The religious point of view presents percepective or interpretation we recieve. Judges order in the world and sufficient evidence for imposed design.

Disputing world views create conflict between faults of the matter? Explanations of those faults? Our interpretation of the world? Wisdom wanted to investigate this.

• 2 people in a neglected garden, some vigorous plants growing! One says gardener bust be caring for them, the other disagrees. The gardener is never seen, the believer says the gardener is invisible, with no scent or sound, the sceptic disagrees- stating how does the intanginle and elusive gardener differ from no gardener?

Wisdoms parable is about 2 observing the world and still seeing the beauty in evil and corruption. Gardener represents God in that he must have been looking after the world for beauty to still show. God is not seen so no proof can be presented, and so the debate is forever with no conclusion met.

Wisdom points out that two solve empirical evidence very differently because of their different percpectives. Believes this procedure in settling debate is similar to the dispute over the world, involves further discussion between two main aims of connecting and disconnecting current observations from other beliefs and observations. Evidence by itself will not suffice.

Anthony Flew said a solid argument presented in the parable is un-falsifiable and cannot be proven wrong as the theist can continue excusing criticisms.

Why did the gardener not set off a tripwire???? Theist would answer that he has no body. It can never be shown otherwise and thus must be un-falsifable.

Through constant qualification and amendment the original statement is un-falsifable and therefore MEANINGLESS.

Religious statements which are not based on reason or fact and are neither falsifable nor verifiable but which are MEANINGLESS nonetheless.

Like individual speaking from religious point of view a paranoid student cannot imagine being wrong! Statements such as; 'all my teachers are out to get me' is unfalsifable.

Belief has deep influence on how student lives their life and the formation of their beliefs, contrary to what FLEW has argued it is possible to meaningfully assent to un-falsifable beliefs.